MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) from the phase 3 ARASENS trial.

2022· article· en· W4286296877 on OpenAlexaff
Fred Saad, Maha Hussain, Bertrand Tombal, Karim Fizazi, Cora N. Sternberg, E. David Crawford, Silke Thiele, Rui Li, Iris Kuss, Heikki Joensuu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDocetaxelProstate cancerHazard ratioProstate-specific antigenInternal medicineOncologyPopulationAndrogen deprivation therapyConfidence intervalCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5078 Background: Reductions in PSA level have been associated with improved OS in patients (pts) with mHSPC. In ARASENS (NCT02799602), darolutamide (DARO) + androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) in combination with docetaxel significantly reduced the risk of death by 32.5% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.675; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.568–0.801; P< 0.0001) vs ADT + docetaxel in pts with mHSPC. We report the association between PSA response and OS from ARASENS. Methods: Pts with mHSPC were randomized 1:1 to DARO 600 mg twice daily or matching PBO + ADT and docetaxel. Serum PSA was measured at screening and every 12 weeks. Exploratory analyses included time to PSA progression (≥25% increase from PSA nadir [lowest or at study entry] and PSA increase ≥2 ng/mL ≥12 weeks from nadir [both confirmed by a second value ≥3 weeks later]) and undetectable PSA (< 0.2 ng/mL for 2 samples ≥3 weeks apart) at 24, 36, and 52 weeks and any time during treatment. Comparisons between treatment groups were performed using the Cochran-Mantel Haenszel test stratified by randomization stratification factors (metastatic spread according to TNM classification and alkaline phosphatase levels at study entry). Post hoc landmark analyses evaluated the association between undetectable PSA at weeks 24 and 36 and OS for the overall population. Results: Of 1306 randomized pts, 1305 were included in the full analysis set (DARO 651; PBO 654), both with ADT and docetaxel. Median (range) PSA levels at study entry were 30.3 (0.0–9219.0) and 24.2 (0.0–11,947.0) ng/mL, respectively. DARO significantly prolonged time to PSA progression (HR 0.255; 95% CI 0.208–0.313; P< 0.0001). Undetectable PSA was achieved in more pts receiving DARO (48.7%) vs PBO (23.9%) at 24 weeks, and the rate continued to increase at 36 and 52 weeks in the DARO group to 57.1% and 60.2%, respectively, vs minimal change in the PBO group (25.1% and 26.1%). Undetectable PSA levels at any time were achieved in 67.3% in the DARO group and 28.6% in the PBO group. A treatment difference in undetectable PSA based on non-overlapping 95% CIs was observed at all time points. For the overall population, OS was improved for pts who achieved undetectable PSA levels vs those who did not at 24 weeks (HR 0.398; 95% CI 0.321–0.493) and 36 weeks (HR 0.351; 95% CI 0.284–0.434). Additional baseline and safety data by PSA level will be reported. Conclusions: The combination of DARO + ADT and docetaxel significantly prolonged the time to PSA progression and more pts receiving DARO vs PBO achieved undetectable PSA levels, reflecting strong PSA response over time. In pts with mHSPC, achievement of undetectable PSA at 24 and 36 weeks was associated with improved OS, with risk of death reduced by 60% and 65%, respectively, vs those who did not achieve undetectable PSA at 24 and 36 weeks. Clinical trial information: NCT02799602.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207